G73 



5^ 



3 



D 525 
.G73 
Copy 1 



A FREE EUROPE 



BEINQ AN INTERVIEW WITH 

The Rt. Hon. 
SIR EDWARD GREY, Bart., K.G. 

British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs 



BY 



EDWARD PRICE BELL 

•/ the "Cblcmgo Dmily NtwM.*' 




T. FISHER UN WIN, Ltd., 

I, ADELPHl TERRACE, LONDON. 
1916. 



riinled iu Gremi BrUain. 



■^ Interview with Sir Edward Grey. 

The Rt. Hon. Sir Edward Grey, K.G., M.P., 
British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, 
talking with Mr. Edward Price Bell, of the 
Chicago Daily Neivs, at luncheon in the States- 
man's temporary London home, on Monday, 
April 10, said substantially this : — 

" Prussian tyranny over Western Europe, 
including these islands, our people will not 
stand. The pledges given by Mr. Asquith as 
regards the restoration of Belgium and Serbia 
shall be kept. We have signed a pact to make 
peace only in concert with our Allies ; this 
pact, I need not say, we shall honour, strictly, 
and to the end. What we and our Allies are 
fighting for is a free Europe. We want a 
Europe free, not only from the domination of 
one nationality by another, but from hectoring 
diplomacy and thfe peril of war, free from the 
constant rattling of the sword in the scabbard 
from perpetual talk of shining armour and war- 
lords. In fact," added Sir Edward refiectivel}^, 
'* we feel we are fighting for equal rights ; for 
law, justice, peace; for civilization, throughout 
the world, as against brute force which knows 
no restraint and no mercy." 

(B4o9) 



To interview Sir Edward Grey, one need 
hardly say, is a unique privilege and honour. 
These came to myself after many months of 
battling with the immemorial prejudice of the 
British public man of high responsibility against 
the journalist as a journalist. It is a fact, 
I believe, that Sir Edward Grey — one of the 
greatest figures of the world war, and one of 
the most famous men in modern political 
history — never was interviewed, in the journal- 
istic sense, before. It is also true, I think, that 
in the long annals of the British Foreign Office 
this is the first instance in which its Chief has 
consented to speak to his fellow-men through 
the mediumship of a correspondent. 

What is the most amazing fact about this 
man ? 

To my mind, it is that the Germans regard 
him as the Mephistopheles of the " Faust " of 
Armageddon — scoffing, sardonic, crafty, fiendish. 
One of their appellations for him is "Satan." 
They feign to believe — possibly do believe — 
that his main object in life has been to brew 
trouble, to bring about war, especially to effect 
the strangulation, or asphyxiation, of Germany. 
This of a man of the most civilised type, broad 
of vision, nurtured in Liberalism, a fly fisherman, 
a tamer of birds and squirrels, a life-long pro- 
tagonist of peace I 



tn 



'' What do you mean by the phrase, ' destruc- 
tion of Prussian miHtarism ' ? " I asked Sir 
Edward. 

THE PRUSSIAN IDEAL. 

" What Prussia proposes, as we understand 
her, is Prussian supremacy. She proposes a 
Europe modelled and ruled by Prussians. She 
is to dispose of the liberties of her neighbours, 
and of us all. We say that life on these terms 
is intolerable. And this also is what France 
and Italy and Russia say. We are not only 
fighting Prussia's attempt to do, in this instance, 
to all of Europe what she did to non-Prussian 
Germany, but fighting the German idea of the 
wholesomeness, almost the desirability, of ever-: 
recurrent war. Prussia under Bismarck deliber- 
ately and admittedly made three wars. We 
wanted a settled peace in Europe and throughout 
the world, which will be a guarantee against 
aggressive war. 

*' Germany's philosophy is that a settled 
peace spells disintegration, degeneracy, the 
sacrifice of the heroic qualities in human 
character. Such a philosophy, if it is to survive 
as a practical force, means eternal apprehension 
and unrest. It means ever-increasing arma- 
ments. It means arresting the development of 
mankind along the lines of culture and humanity. 



THE BRITISH IDEAL. 

*' We are fighting tliis idea. We do not believe 
in war as the preferable method of settling 
^ disputes between nations. When nations cannot 
sec eye to eye, when they quarrel, when there 
is a threat of war, avc believe the controversy 
sliould be settled by methods other than those 
of war. Such other methods are always success- 
ful when there is goodwill and no aggressive 
spirit. 

" We believe in negotiation. We have faith 
in international conferences. We proposed a 
conference before this war broke out. We urged 
Germany to agree to a conference. Germany 
declined to do so. Then I requested Germany 
to select some form of mediation, some method 
of peaceful settlement, of her own. She would 
not come forward with any such suggestion. 
Then the Emperor of Russia proposed to 
Germany to send the dispute to the Hague 
Tribunal. There was no response. Our pro- 
posal of a conference was rejected by Germany : 
Russia, France and Italy all accepted it. Our 
proposal that Germany suggest some means of 
peaceful settlement met with no success, nor 
did the Czar's proposal of arbitration. No 
impartial judgment of any kind was to be 
permitted to enter. It was a case of Europe 
submitting to the Texxtonio will, or going to war. 



" If the Conference in London in the Balkan 
crisis in 1912-13 had been worked to the dis- 
advantage of Germany or her alhes, the German 
reluctance for a conference in 1914 would have 
been intelligible, but no more convincing pledge 
of fair play and single-minded desire for fair 
settlement than the conduct of that Conference 
in London was ever given. And in 1914, after 
Serbia had accepted nine-tenths of Austria's 
demands, the settlement of outstandi^ ques- 
tions would have been easy. Russia ordered 
no general mobilization till Germany had refused 
a conference and till German preparations for 
war were far ahead of the Russians. Germany 
declared war on Russia when Austria was 
showing every disposition to come to terms ; 
and Germany was in fact at war with Russia 
four or five days before Austria, though the 
quarrel at that time was one that primarily 
concerned Austria and not Germany." 

THE TWO METHODS. 

After a moment's reflection, Sir Edward 
continued : 

" These two methods of settling international 
disputes — ^the method of negotiation and the 
method of war — I ask you to consider in the 
light of this struggle. Do we not see the disaster 
of the war method conclusively shown ? How 
much better would have been a conference, 



6 

or The Hague, in 1914, than what has happened 
since ! Industry and commerce dislocated ; the 
burdens of life heavily increased ; millions of 
men slain, maimed, blinded ; international 
hatreds deepened and intensified ; the very 
fabric of civilization menaced — these from the 
war method. The conference we proposed, or 
The Hague proposed by the Czar, would have 
settled the quarrel in a little time — I think a 
conference would have settled it in a week — and 
all these calamities would have been averted. 
Moreover — a thing of vast importance — we 
should have gone a long way in laying the 
permanent foundations for international peace." 

NEUTRALS AND PEACE. 

"Do you think neutrals ever will be able to 
help towards peace?" I inquired. 

" The injustice done by this war has got to 
be set right. The Allies can tolerate no peace 
that leaves the wrongs of this war unredressed. 
When persons come to me with pacific counsels, 
I think they should tell me what sort of peace 
they have in mind. They should let me know 
on which side they stand, for the opponents 
do not agree. If they think, for example, that 
Belgium was innocent of offence ; that she has 
been unspeakably wronged ; that she should 
be set up again by those who tore her down. 



then, it seems to me, they should say so. Peace 
counsels that are purely abstract and make no 
attempt to discriminate between the rights and 
the wrongs of this war are ineffective, if not 
irrelevant." 

" ' Desire for conquest, lust for revenge, and 
jealousy of the economic competitor in the world 
market,' " I reminded Sir Edward, " were 
suggested by Herr von Bethmann-HoUweg as 
' the three driving forces of the coalition against 
Germany before the war.' " 

" There was no coalition against Germany 
before the war," answered Sir Edward. " Ger- 
many knew there was no coalition against her. 
We had assured her, in the most formal and 
categorical way, that in no circumstances would, 
we be a party to any aggression against her. 
She wanted us to pledge ourselves to uncondi- 
tional neutrality — wanted us to declare that 
no matter what she did on the Continent Ave 
should not interfere. It is true that she always 
referred to a possible war forced on her. The 
trouble was that she gave us no test of a war 
forced on her. She remained free to claim 
that any war was forced on her. She now 
claims that this war was forced on her. I 
need hardly remind you that at the outset 
Italy, the third member of the Triple Alliance, 
definitely refused to accept this view. No one 



8 

thought of attacking Germany ; there was not 
a measure taken by any other power that was 
not purely defensive ; the German preparations 
were for attack and were far ahead of others 
on the Continent." 

BELGIUM A BULWARK. 

" You observed the German Chancellor's 
recent reference to Belgium as a ' bulwark ' ? " 
" Belgium was a bulwark — defensive of 
Germany, of France, and of European peace. 
This bulwark, until Germany decided to make 
war, was in no danger from any quarter. In 
April, 1 91 3, we had given renewed assurance 
to Belgium to respect her neutrality. When war 
threatened, we asked France if she would 
adhere to her pledge to respect the neutrality 
of Belgium. She said ' Yes.' We asked 
Germany the same question, and she declined 
to answer. Immediately afterwards, in scorn 
of her signature, she assaulted and destroyed 
the bulwark. Herr von Bethmann-Hollweg 
acknowledged the wrong, pleading that 
' necessity knows' no law,' and promised that 
as soon as Germany's military aims were realised 
she would restore Belgium. Now he says there 
can be no status quo ante, either in the East or 
in the West. In other words, Belgium's in- 
dependence is gone, as Serbia's and Montenegro's 
are gone, unless the Allies can set them up again. 



9 

*' To all this we say to Germany, ' Recognise 
the principle urged by lovers of freedom every- 
where : give to the nationalities of Europe a 
real freedom, not the so-called freedom doled 
out to subject peoples by Prussian tyranny, 
and make reparation as far as it can be made for 
the wrong done.' " 

BRITISH AIMS. 

" Should you mind indicating the object of 
Britain's rapprochements in recent years ? " 
I asked. 

" Good relations and an end to quarrels with 
other powers. Going far back, we had working 
relations with the Triple Alliance. But we 
were habitually in friction with France or Russia. 
Again and again it brought us to the verge of 
war. So we decided to come to an arrangement 
with France, and then with Russia — not with 
any hostile intent towards Germany, or any 
other power, but wholly to pave the way to 
permanent peace. So, instead of preparing 
for war, as Germany asserts, without a vestige 
of truth to support the assertion, we were en- 
deavouring to avoid war. And German states- 
men knew we were endeavouring to avoid war 
and not to make it." 

" German statesmen assert that England is 
the only real obstacle to peace." 



10 

" Nobody wants peace more than we want it. 
But we want a peace that does justice, and a 
peace that re-estabhshes respect for the pubHc 
law of the world. Presumably Germany would 
like neutrals to think we are applying pressure 
to keep France, Russia and Italy in the war. 
We are not. France, Russia and Italy need no 
urging to keep them in the war. They know 
why they are in the war. They know they are 
in it to preserve everything that is precious to 
nationality. It is this knowledge which makes 
them determined and unconquerable. It is 
quite impossible for me to express to you 
our admiration of the achievements of our 
associates in this struggle. And as is the 
measure of our admiration, so also will be 
the measure of our contribution to the common 
cause. 

" There are two statements that come from 
German sources. One is that we are preventing 
the Allies from making peace — that goes to the 
address of neutrals. The other is that we are 
meditating separate peace with Germany and 
intend to abandon our Allies — ^that goes to the 
address of one or other of the Allies. Each 
statement is absolutely untrue." 

" You have noted that Herr von Bethmann- 
Hollweg affirms that Britain wants to destroy 
' united and free Germany.' " 



11 

" We never were smitten with any such 
madness. We want nothing of the sort, and 
Herr von Bethmann-Hollweg knows we want 
nothing of the sort. We should be glad to see 
the German people free, as we ourselves want 
to be free, and as we want the other nationalities 
of Europe and of the world to be free. It 
belongs to the rudiments of political science, it 
is abundantly taught by history, that you cannot 
enslave a people, and make a success of the 
job — that you cannot kill a people's soul by 
foreign despotism and brutality. We aspire 
to embark upon no such course of folly and 
futility towards another nation. We believe 
that the German people — when once the dreams 
of world-empire, cherished by pan-Germanism 
are brought to nought — will insist upon the 
control of its government ; and in this lies the 
hope of secure freedom and national in- 
dependence in Europe. For a German 
democracy will not plot and plan wars, as 
Prussian militarism plotted wars, to take place 
at a chosen date in the future." 

In the midst of war. Sir Edward Grey's great 
vision remains a vision of peace — not a wobbly 
peace, not a peace vulnerable to political and 
militarist intrigue and ambition, but a peace 
secured by the unified and armed purpose of 
civilization. Long before this war, Sir Edward 



12 

hoped for a league of nations that would be 
united, quick and instant, to prevent, and, if 
need be, to punish violation of international 
treaties, of public right, of national independence, 
and would say to nations that come forward 
with grievances and claims, " Put them before 
an impartial tribunal. Subject your claims to 
the test of law or the judgment of impartial 
men. If you can win at this bar, you will get 
what you want ; if you cannot, you shall not 
have what you want ; and, if you attempt to 
start a war, we all shall adjudge you the common 
enemy of humanity, and treat you accordingly. 
As footpads, safe-breakers, burglars, and in- 
cendiaries are suppressed in nations, so those 
who would commit these crimes, and in- 
calculably more than these crimes, will be 
suppressed among nations." 

LESSON OF THE WAR. 

" Unless mankind learns from this war to 
avoid war," said Sir Edward, in conclusion, 
" the struggle will have been in vain. Further- 
more, it seems to me that over humanity will 
loom the menace of destruction. The Germans I 
have thrown the door wide open to every form 
of attack upon human life. The use of poisonous 
fumes, or something akin to them in war, was 
recommended to our naval or military authorities 



13 

many years ago, and was rejected by them as 
too horrible for civilized peoples to use. The 
Germans have come with floating mines in 
the open seas, threatening belligerents and 
neutrals equally ; they have come with the 
iiidiscriminating, murderous Zeppelin, which 
does military damage only by accident ; they 
have come with the submarine, which destroys 
neutral and belligerent ships and crews in scorn 
alike of law and of mercy ; they have come upon 
blameless nations with invasion and incendiarism 
and confiscation ; they have come with 
poisonous gases and liquid fire. All their 
scientific genius has been dedicated to wiping 
out human life. They have forced these things 
into general use in war. If the world cannot 
organise against war, if war must go on, then 
nations can protect themselves henceforth only 
by using whatever destructive agencies they can 
invent, till the resources and inventions of 
science end by destroying the humanity 
that they were meant to serve. The Germans 
assert that their culture is so extraordinarily 
superior that it gives them a normal right 
'to impose it upon the rest of the world 
by force. Will the outstanding contribution 
of Kultur disclosed in this war be such 
efficiency in slaughter as to lead to wholesale 
extermination ? 



14 



" The Prussian authorities have apparently 
but one idea of peace, an iron peace imposed on 
other nations by German supremacy. They do 
not understand that free men and free nations 
will rather die than submit to that ambition, 
and that there can be no end to war till it is 
defeated and renounced." 



LoNDOK : Sir Joseph Causxon & Sons/ Limited, 



Oeacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: crp onp 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

111 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township. PA 16066 
(724) 779-2111 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



021 547 798 8 • 



